Michigan

Letter: Disappointed with Upton's approach to the environment

Recently my congressman, U.S. Rep. Fred Upton, sided with big polluters and voted for a bill in Washington that attacks critical protections for clean air and clean water.

When Fred is asked why he changed from initially voting for the Clean Air Act to now trying to limit the Environmental Protection Agency's regulation of greenhouse gases, he couches his opposition in terms of jobs lost and the specter of too much government regulation.

He does not seem to recall that the Supreme Court directed the EPA to assess whether greenhouse gases were truly a threat to public health, Based on the studies the EPA reviewed, these substances were found to be a clear threat to public health and welfare and the EPA was, by default, given the authority to regulate them. (And from a real-life perspective, how many of us would eagerly relocate to a neighborhood near a coal-fired energy plant or cement factory — particularly if we have family members with asthma or lung disease?)

The outlook for jobs in renewable energy is as good as that of any industry and his refrain of "too much government regulation" is puzzling in light of how too little government regulation gave us the financial meltdown and last year's BP disaster.

I hope Fred will search his soul and remember that he is in office to protect the health and welfare of all of those who elected him and not just one segment of the voting public.

For now, I am extremely disappointed that Rep. Upton is voting for legislation that attacks my health and that of my family and community. Now I am counting on senators Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin to stand up for protecting public health and to reject attacks on our air and water.